R-pod Owners Forum Homepage

This site is free to use.
Donations benefit a non-profit Girls Softball organization

Forum Home Forum Home > R-pod Discussion Forums > Introduce Yourself
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: New 2015 r-pod 178 hood river
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedNew 2015 r-pod 178 hood river

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
Larry158 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 01 Oct 2014
Location: Old Forge NY
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 45
Direct Link To This Post Topic: New 2015 r-pod 178 hood river
    Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 10:54am
Outbound,
Thank you for your comments & info. I have been telling my wife that we are retired and in no rush to get to our destination. The benefits (mpg wise) of going 55-60mph is like water off a duck's back where my wife is concerned. Will just keep on podding & hope she naps a lot.
Larry158

Back to Top
Podster View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 Sep 2014
Location: San Antonio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1108
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 10:26am
Originally posted by Outbound

  In a nutshell, the r-pod creates a low-pressure area right behind itself, sucking the trailer backward. 

Interesting...I have a bike rack on the back with two bikes. Is there a way to check the affect the bikes would have on breaking up that stream?

Can you, with your modeling, test different devices on the PODs rear to simulate the breakup of the stream and the effect it would have on breaking the vacuum? Resulting of the release of the associated drag on the POD, or any RV for that matter. 

Good stuff...this could lead to a new product if an MPH gain can be proven. I see a horizontal rake with suction cups 4' or 5' across that can be stuck to the rear of the POD to break the vacuum resulting in ↑ MPH.

...let this post serve as an initial copy right notice and 10% royalty claim. Smile

We'll call it the "POD Airflow disrupter ©" or "PODAD" 

Cliff & Raelynn
Ranger 4.0/178
(1/2 ton 5,800lb tow capacity)
Back to Top
hogone View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Location: St. Louis
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 9:10am
kind of like what you see the tractor trailers using now on the back of there trailers.  hogone
Jon & Pam
2013 RP177
2010 F150
2017 HD Streetglide
2009 HD Lowrider
CHEESEHEAD
Back to Top
techntrek View Drop Down
Admin Group - pHp
Admin Group - pHp
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Location: MD
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9059
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 8:59am
I would bet if you added a rectangular extension on the back of the pod (similar to marwayne's addition up front) it would smooth out that low pressure area.
Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ Pod instruction manual
Back to Top
hogone View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Location: St. Louis
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 8:32am
very interesting outbound.  hogone
Jon & Pam
2013 RP177
2010 F150
2017 HD Streetglide
2009 HD Lowrider
CHEESEHEAD
Back to Top
hogone View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Location: St. Louis
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 8:30am
haven't used a wind defelector, however some of us (myself included) have noted a slight increase in mpg when we have a canoe/kayaks on top of the tv.  i have a hard pod carrier that i plan on attaching to my tv someday to see if there is a difference.  hogone
Jon & Pam
2013 RP177
2010 F150
2017 HD Streetglide
2009 HD Lowrider
CHEESEHEAD
Back to Top
Outbound View Drop Down
podders Helping podders - pHp
podders Helping podders - pHp
Avatar

Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Location: Oshawa, Ontario
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 767
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 8:27am
The r-pod has an aerodynamic-looking shape, but the reality is that it is far from aerodynamic.

Five years ago, when I bought my r-pod, I did some aerodynamic modelling of the r-pod in motion.  The front of the r-pod is fine - air flows relatively smoothly over the vehicle and up, across the top of the r-pod.  The problem is the rear half of the trailer.

Instead of smoothly flowing down the back of the r-pod, the air continues out essentially horizontally toward the rear of the trailer.  Then, it takes a sharp downward turn and hits the ground 3-5 feet behind the trailer, turning back in toward the trailer and creating a great big swirling low-pressure vortex.  In a nutshell, the r-pod creates a low-pressure area right behind itself, sucking the trailer backward.

I tried air deflectors in various positions to smooth out the airflow, but it was without significant improvement.  Honestly, it is what it is.  The best solution I've found: slower (55 mph) speeds are best for MPGs.



Craig :: 2009 RP171 towed by a 2017 F150
Back to Top
Larry158 View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 01 Oct 2014
Location: Old Forge NY
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 45
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Dec 2014 at 7:52am
ALL,
Has anyone had experience with a roof wind defletor on their tv. If so what were the results & what brand did you use?
Larry158
Back to Top
knoopr55 View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 01 Dec 2014
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 11:54pm
Thanks for all the input everyone, looks like it is just a fact of R-pod life. Duck hunting just got a little more expensive that's all.
Back to Top
techntrek View Drop Down
Admin Group - pHp
Admin Group - pHp
Avatar

Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Location: MD
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 9059
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Dec 2014 at 3:32pm
Yup, frontal area has by far the biggest affect on mpg.  Once you've graduated to a full-height camper like the pod, no matter how round, you'll hit the numbers mentioned above.  The last 2 summers we drove our pod 5000 and 7000 miles and both times the trip average was around 9.5-9.7.  We hit some big hills on both trips, especially this past summer which I expect kept us below 10.  I recently upgraded to a 6000 pound camper and while I've only had 2 semi-local trips, the mpg didn't change much.  

Here is a comparison for you.  Our prior TV was a Sienna.  Daily driving it got 23 mpg.  With our Coleman popup, around 3500 pounds loaded up, it got 16.  The pod was around 2700-2800 pounds loaded and it got 11-12.
Doug ~ '10 171 (2009-2015) ~ 2008 Salem ~ Pod instruction manual
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.64
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz